Sunday, December 22, 2013

It would be terrible to order me to use a contraceptive because I believe that it is a sin, and will land me in the hell fires for eternity (more or less).

The thou shalt not view of religious doctrine supports an absolutism of religious freedom doctrine that I think is quite wrong. What we need is more casuistry and less absolutism. - gwcBrian Leiter: Why Tolerate Religion? | Sticker | Zeitschrift für philosophische Literatur: ...Leiter argues that it is legitimate for a liberal state to promote a notion of the good that violates the conscience of some of its members, if it is not the goal of this procedure to violate their conscience or to coerce consciences of minorities beyond what the Harm Principle would licence. Leiter concludes: The no-exemptions approach is “the one most consistent with fairness (given the practicalities of enforcement)” (130-131). Leiter acknowledges that there will always be some people (religious or not) who, based on their conscience, will refuse to comply with general laws. These people might be right or wrong, still that is no argument against No-Exemptions: “Toleration may be a virtue, both in individuals and in states, but its selective application to the conscience of only religious believers is not morally defensible” (133).